Mark Williams-Thomas making new three part crime series for Ch5.

[Venturi Swirl]

I've never asked for or expected the Germans to disclose their evidence, which is what you accused me of.

Some are prepared to trust Wolters and believe he has the evidence he needs to charge CB. I'll believe it when it happens.

What’s wrong with the benefit of the doubt, or do you have no doubt about him being a lying incompetent?

[Wonderfulspam]

What’s wrong with the benefit of the doubt, or do you have no doubt about him being a lying incompetent?

The benefit of the doubt goes to the accused doesn't it?

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence & all that, which I believe is something McCann supporters are firmly adhered to.

So, Wolters has nothing.

[barrier]

This is the point, surely.  If Breuckner had an alibi he would have to be insane not to produce it.

Why ? its up to the accuser to produce the evidence with which they are accused with. With the BKA not producing it its clear theres not enough so maybe any alibi told through the press does stack up.

Does any one seriously think the spat in the press is worthy, from day one the interest in the "disappearence" has been conducted through and by the press, the police investigation is but a distraction and fodder for them.

[Wonderfulspam]

I think there is massive reasons to believe Wolters.  I said yesterday I thought it a waste of time discussing it.. I was right.  Imo you are blinded by bias.  Doesn't matter.. Wolters at some stage will have to reveal his evidence and we will see who's the dunce

You yourself of course have absolutely no bias.

If the paedophile said he's innocent you'd be willing to consider he might be, & not influenced in your decision by the matter of his prior sex offences.

Right?

[Mr Gray]

You yourself of course have absolutely no bias.

If the paedophile said he's innocent you'd be willing to consider he might be, & not influenced in your decision by the matter of his prior sex offences.

Right?

Wrong.
His guilt should be decided based on the evidence

[Wonderfulspam]

Wrong.
His guilt should be decided based on the evidence

So, bearing in mind we have no evidence Brueckner abducted or murdered Maddie, you think he could be innocent, right?

[Mr Gray]

So, bearing in mind we have no evidence Brueckner abducted or murdered Maddie, you think he could be innocent, right?

Absolutely

[Venturi Swirl]

if a convicted rapist and paedophile claimed he was innocent of a crime of rape or paedophilia I would be less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, it's true.  However HCW does not as far as I'm aware have a track record in lying and deceiving the public, or making false allegations therefore I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt...

[Wonderfulspam]

if a convicted rapist and paedophile claimed he was innocent of a crime of rape or paedophilia I would be less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, it's true.  However HCW does not as far as I'm aware have a track record in lying and deceiving the public, or making false allegations therefore I am prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt...

You don't have access to or any knowledge of, Wolters employment history, track record for honesty, prosecution success rate & what he gets up to in the bedroom though.

[G-Unit]

That's up to you.. Why can't you accept others have a different view

I can. If others want to place their trust in a German prosecutor that's fine. It's when they try to argue that they're relying on evidence, not on trust, that I will get involved.

[Venturi Swirl]

I can. If others want to place their trust in a German prosecutor that's fine. It's when they try to argue that they're relying on evidence, not on trust, that I will get involved.

Sigh.  Here we go round the Mulberry Bush. Again.

[Mr Gray]

I can. If others want to place their trust in a German prosecutor that's fine. It's when they try to argue that they're relying on evidence, not on trust, that I will get involved.

.

I'm relying on evidence and I dint really care what you think as imo you don't understand  what evidence is

[G-Unit]

.

I'm relying on evidence and I dint really care what you think as imo you don't understand  what evidence is

No you're not - you don't know what the evidence is.

[Venturi Swirl]

I can. If others want to place their trust in a German prosecutor that's fine. It's when they try to argue that they're relying on evidence, not on trust, that I will get involved.

Which evidence in this case do you have trust in, out of interest?

[Wonderfulspam]

Which evidence in this case do you have trust in, out of interest?

Maddie was filmed on an airport bus & at some point photographed at a tennis court.

That's the only fully reliable evidence in this case imo.

All the rest is witness statements, which are prone to error so can't be fully trusted.